TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Dent (In re Trans Air, Inc.)

In re TRANS AIR, INC., f/k/a Trans Island Airways, Inc., Debtor. CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, N.A. v. Janice Lee DENT, A.I.M. Investment Corp., and Trans Air, Inc.

Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Dent (In re Trans Air, Inc.), 79 B.R. 947 (Bankr. S.D. Florida 1987)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Bankruptcy Courts
Decided
November 24, 1987
Docket
Nos. Bankruptcy No. 86-02525-BKC-SMW; Adv. No. 86-0609-BKC-SMW-A
Judges
Weaver
Citations
79 B.R. 9471987 Bankr. LEXIS 2060

Opinion of the Court — Weaver

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL FINDINGS OF FACT, FOR AMENDMENT OR ALTERATION OF JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR NEW TRIAL SIDNEY M. WEAVER, Bankruptcy Judge.

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on November 4, 1987 on a Motion For Additional Findings of Fact, For Amendment or Alteration of Judgment or in the Alternative, For New Trial and with the Court being fully advised in the premises, makes the following clarifications:

Janice Dent moves this Court for a determination that the actual transfer of money occurred on May 6, 1986 when the assignment was perfected and the transfer was completed rather than on January 11, 1986 when she executed the assignment. Dent argues that if the later date is the date of the actual transfer, then she was no longer an insider of the debtor under 11 U.S.C. § 101 (30)(B)(vi) and the transfer cannot be avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 547 .

It may be true that if the entire assignment transaction occurred on May 6, 1986 then Dent’s argument would have merit. However, even if Dent is correct and she could not have initially been classified an insider when the assignment was perfected and the transfer completed, she was an insider when the assignment was initiated and the documents were executed. DeRosa v. Buildex Incorp. and Instrument Systems Corp. (In re F & S Central Manufacturing Corp.), 53 B.R. 842 , 13 B.C.D. 823 (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.1985). See also Kleinfeld v. University State Bank (In re Davenport) 64 B.R. 411, 414 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1986) and Pirrone v. Toboroff (In re Vaniman Intern., Inc.), 22 B.R. 166, 189 (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.1982). Dent would have this Court allow insiders to escape the avoidance provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 547 merely by delaying the date the debtor actually transfers its property. Such a result is not required by the statute. Instead, this Court adopts the reasoning found in the DeRosa case and finds that “a creditor who is an insider at the time the transfer of the debtor’s property is arranged is an insider at the time of the transfer.” DeRosa, 53 B.R. 842 , 13 B.C.D. at 826.

Dent executed the assignment documents on January 11, 1986 when she was an insider thereby concluding the arrangements to transfer the money from the debt- *948 or to herself. The determination of her insider status became fixed, with regard to this particular transaction, at the point of execution, not at the subsequent perfection date.

Based on the foregoing it is:

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED the Motion for Additional Findings of Fact is granted to the extent of the above stated findings. The Motion for Amendments or Alteration of Judgment or in the Alternative For New Trial is denied.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1989: 11992: 11996: 12002: 12006: 12010: 12012: 119892026peak 1989 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Algernon L. Butler, Jr., Trustee for Ed Tatum Motors, Incorporated v. David Shaw, Incorporated72 F.3d 437 (4th Cir. 1996)
  2. Jahn v. Economy Car Leasing, Inc. (In re Henderson)96 B.R. 820 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1989)
  3. Freeland v. Enodis Corp. (In re Consolidated Industries Corp.)292 B.R. 354 (N.D. Ind. 2002)
  4. EECO Inc. v. Smedes (In re EECO Inc.)138 B.R. 260 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1992)
  5. Jahn v. Char (In re Incentium, LLC)473 B.R. 264 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2012)
  6. Pummill v. McGivern (In re American Eagle Coatings, Inc.)353 B.R. 656 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2006)

Most recent

  1. Jahn v. Char (In re Incentium, LLC)473 B.R. 264 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2012)
  2. Zucker v. Freeman (In re Netbank, Inc.)424 B.R. 568 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2010)
  3. Pummill v. McGivern (In re American Eagle Coatings, Inc.)353 B.R. 656 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2006)
  4. Freeland v. Enodis Corp. (In re Consolidated Industries Corp.)292 B.R. 354 (N.D. Ind. 2002)
  5. Algernon L. Butler, Jr., Trustee for Ed Tatum Motors, Incorporated v. David Shaw, Incorporated72 F.3d 437 (4th Cir. 1996)
  6. EECO Inc. v. Smedes (In re EECO Inc.)138 B.R. 260 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 1992)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
DeRosa v. Buildex Inc. (In re F & S Cent. Mfg. Corp.), 53 B.R. 842 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1985) 75
Pirrone v. Toboroff (In re Vaniman Int'l, Inc.), 22 B.R. 166 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1982) 45
Kleinfeld v. Univ. State Bank (In re Davenport), 64 B.R. 411 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1986) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list